See Also

POLITICO 44

President Barack Obama called rap star Kanye West “a jackass.” Vice President Joe Biden told a senator to “Gimme a f—-ing break!” Economic adviser Christina Romer declared that Americans had yet to have their "holy s—-” moment over the economy.

Those who pay attention to political rhetoric say an unusual amount of profanity has emanated from this White House – even without counting famously colorful White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel. But before this statement becomes fodder for yet another partisan debate (with conservatives saying Obama is disgracing the presidency, and liberals that the media are once again being unfair), they quickly add that Team Obama is no crasser than administrations past. It’s just that they are being quoted more accurately.

What’s different, according to linguists, media analysts and reporters who’ve covered past administrations is the media: Networks and newspapers have become far more willing to run with quotes, video and audio of political figures and their aides saying things that never used to be repeated. They attribute the growth of the political potty mouth alternately to the proliferation of recording technologies; intense interest in all things Obama; the explosion of new media platforms that both circumvent and push traditional media while sharpening competition; a general coarsening of the public dialogue; or some combination of all of those factors.

“Cursing happened all the time, across the board, wherever you went in the White House or on the trail or in campaign offices – it simply wasn’t written about,” said Haynes Johnson, a former reporter for The Washington Post who covered the campaigns or presidencies of every president from Dwight Eisenhower to Bill Clinton, and has written books about the working White House, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and, most recently, the 2008 presidential election.

Presidents Johnson and Nixon were known for their salty tongues. And though they were seldom quoted cursing in contemporary media accounts, coverage of the Watergate tapes – in which Nixon was recorded liberally tossing around vulgarity, as well as disparaging Jews and African Americans– marked the first time many newspapers printed the slang word for manure, and foreshadowed a dilemma common for media outlets in the YouTube era.

The occasion was the release of a secret recording from the infamous White House tapes in which Nixon urged an aide to cover-up the White House’s role in the Watergate break-in, saying in part “I don't give a s—- what happens, I want you all to stonewall it."

Then- New York Times editor Abe Rosenthal explained at the time that the paper did not intend to put the word in regular circulation, famously declaring “We'll only take s—- from the president."

At the Post, Johnson said “we had a huge discussion about this and it finally got in,” but he added “in most of these conversations that I am talking about, there was an understanding that you weren’t going to quote that language. The same way you didn’t write about Jack Kennedy and sex. It was the same attitude."

“You protected your sources. You did not want to embarrass them. You really wanted to know who these people were, and you wanted them to be honest with you and if they were going to watch their words and watch their language, they’re not going to talk to you.”

Johnson said the more frequent quoting of politicians’ profane proclamations or airing of clips containing them “is part of today’s media environment and the competition to get hot stuff,” but he warned the trend risks making it even more difficult for reporters to get unfiltered access to and information from politicians.

“It erodes further the trust between the government and the news gatherers,” he said. “I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t report what someone said if it’s illuminating. I’m only saying you should tread lightly. Just sprinkling four letter words into your quotations, I think, is ridiculous.”

A story in the Oct. 12 New Yorker about Obama’s economic team was a good example of the kind of unexpurgated language reporters now feel freer to quote.

Readers' Comments (1094)

If this is any indication, it's going to be a sloooooow news day. *Sigh*

Anybody else wonder how Native Americans feel about Columbus Day? After all, for them this really marks the beginning of their genocide. Pretty much the opposite of a day of celebration, I would imagine.

the agency I worked at said you could either take off Columbus day or celebrate it as Hugo Chavez day and take that off. It was agency wide, or maybe even Santa Cruz wide. Regardless it was left wing day - all day in santa cruz.

When Cheney says the f-word, he seems to mean it with malice and harsh intent...when Biden uses the f-word, he uses it to empha a statement, and not literally. Kind of a difference in my book, but there it is.